[[alternative]]The Application Effects of a Self-designed Curriculum for Developmentally Delayed Preschoolers

[[abstract]]The Application Effects of a Self-designed Curriculum for Developmentally Delayed Preschoolers AbstractThe main purpose of this study was to explore the applicationeffects of a self-designed curriculum for developmentally delayed preschoolers. The subjects included 26 experts and teachers inthe first draft curriculum evaluation interview, 50 age three tofive developmentally delayed preschoolers during the experimentalteaching session, and 11 teachers participated in the experimentalfor the final curriculum evaluation interview. Data were gathered by Minnesota Child Development Inventory (CCDI), Denver Developmental screening test (DDST), a self-designed developmentally delayed curriculum checklist, a teacher report checklist, and boththe pre-experimental curriculum evaluation form and post-experimental curriculum evaluation form. Data were analyzedby both quantitative(t test, one-way analysis of covariance, etc.) and qualitative methods.The main findings were:1. For the opinions of the curriculum for developmentally delayed preschoolers,(1) most of the experts and teachers showed positive attitudestowards the first draft curriculum for developmentally delayed preschoolers.(2) over 40% of the interviewees presently used "curriculum outlines for the Moderately and Severely Mentally Retarded", " Kong Heep Hong Society for Handicapped Children Developmental Learning Package" and "Portage Early Education Program"as their early intervention curricula.(3) all participating in the experiment teachers gave positivesupport and high recommendation of the curriculum.(4) both pre-experimental and post-experimental interviewees thought curriculum content broadly connected with dailylife and very suitable for developmentally delayedpreschoolers. 2. On the application effects of " curriculum for developmentally delayed preschoolers"(1) after four-month instruction, experimental group subjects' performances were significantly higher than those of the control group in CCDI. (2) experimental group subjects were significantly better than control group subjects in gross motor, language, and self-care and social skills in DDST. 80% of the subjects in fine motor and adaptive ability subtest was significantly better than control group. (3) experimental group was significantly better than before in all performances of the self-designed developmentally delayed curriculum checklist. (4) on teacher report checklist, experimental group' performances in gross motor , fine motor, language, social skills, cognitive and self-care were all better than those of the control group. Based on the above findings, some suggestions were made forcurriculum content, teaching design, and future research.